MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6959338803 · doi:10.11575/prism/49526

Adapting Arts-Based Engagement Ethnography for Different Newcomer Groups

2023· other· en· W6959338803 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParticipatory Visual Research Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnographyFocus groupParticipant observationCitizenshipQualitative researchPhoto elicitationCultural competenceSet (abstract data type)Process (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background. In 2021, Canada’s newcomer community (individuals who have arrived in Canada as immigrants, refugees, or international students within the last five years) had increased significantly to 1 in 4 people (Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship Canada, 2023). For many newcomers, schools and communities are their first experience of Canadian culture and the site in which they learn about the norms of their host culture (Areepattamannil & Freeman, 2008; Berry et al., 2006; Rossiter & Rossiter; 2009). Methods. An arts-based engagement ethnography (ABEE) is an innovative, culturally sensitive, and multimodal approach to qualitative research conducted with underrepresented communities (Goopy & Kassan, 2019; Kassan et al., 2020). The intersection of social justice principles and ABEE form a unique research process that is participant-driven and easily adaptable to working with newcomer youth and families, allowing researchers to unearth how newcomers experience integration into Canadian society both individually and collectively. Each participant is given a set of cultural probes (e.g., iPad, diary, maps, stationary, and polaroid camera) and asked to create artifacts that document their integration experiences. The content of participants’ artifacts is used to develop individual interview protocols for each youth or family member, followed by a collective interview through focus groups with students or a family interview. Observations. Results and key learnings from current and past ABEE studies with newcomer youth and families will be presented, including cultural artifacts and integration themes. Conclusion. We present implications for researchers, as well as graduate students, practitioners, and service providers working with newcomer youth and families.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.866
GPT teacher head0.696
Teacher spread0.171 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicParticipatory Visual Research MethodsFrench-language works237,207